Down to two princess cuts, help me pick! ASETs incl.

[msf12555]

First of all, thanks to everyone who has helped me out the last week by teaching me about diamonds and helping me make informed decisions. I have now basically narrowed my choice down to two diamonds.

I found the first one on JA, and someone on here kindly suggested to find two others on JA that I like, and request ASETs for the lot of them. I just got the ASETs back, along with their gemologists review. This is what their gemologist had to say:

"We've also taken the liberty of having these diamonds inspected by one of our graduate gemologists and I'm happy to say that diamond 1453159 (1.02crt F VS1) is very bright and has great light performance! As you would expect, it is also eye clean and icy white in color. I recommend this diamond for your diamond purchase because it's the brightest of the group and will look beautiful in any setting. Best of all, it's also the least expensive diamond of your selections!"

Here is a link to that diamonds page:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS1-Very%20Good-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1453159.asp

Below I have included the two ASETs that they sent me for that diamond.


My second diamond I found on WF, and it is one of their ACA diamonds. It is two color grades worse, and one clarity grade worse. However, it seems to have a better looking ASET than the one from JA (just to me, but I also really have no idea what I'm looking at). the diamond from WF looks to have more red to me. Below is the link from WF, which has an ASET and IS image on the page:

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/princess-cut-loose-diamond-2763535.htm

So, that's my dilemma. Which one is going to look better? The JA diamond is about 500 bucks more expensive, FWIW. One other thing to consider is that the setting she likes is on WF, but I would honestly pay extra for a third party to set it if the JA diamond is going to be a better performer.

Lastly, I do know a GIA certified gemologist personally (for about 15 years) and she has ordered three princess cuts to her shop in NY (I'm in California) to look at. She said she will look at the three she gets in, along with my best performer that I find online (or at least, the ASETs, IS images, all available numbers, etc), and make a suggestion. Something to think about I guess.

So that's it. Out of these two, which do you think will be the best performer? Mostly I really need an ASET preference between the two. the WF ASET looks better to me, but I'm very uneducated on the subject? Opinions? Thanks in advance!!! James Allen ASETs below, WF ASET is through the link I provided..

 

[chel180]

I vote for the WF stone. I think the WF ASET is better- less leakage. Also I prefer the smaller table on the WF stone too.

 

[farmer gal]

I would go with the WF stone, I also like the smaller table better

 

[msf12555]

That's the one that looked better to me, as there doesn't appear to be ANY white in the WF ASET. But I don't know anything about ASET images, hence my questions in here. Anyone else have any opinions? I would really like to make my purchase tomorrow, and I appreciate all the input.

Also, as a side question, is the color H in the WF stone going to be noticeable to the naked eye as opposed to F in the other one? Just curious, as an aside. The ASET image and light performance / sparkle between the two is more important to me.

 

[chel180]

I have a I princess and can't notice the color against FGH stones. I wouldn't worry about the color drop at all and I completely agree with your statement about sparkle being more important.

 

[msf12555]

Chel, Thanks for all the help, it is much appreciated. So, I have read tutorials about ASET, but I am still curious...What all makes one look better than another? More red and less white? Positioning of certain colors? At this point, light performance, sparkle, brilliance, etc are the most important things to me. Both stones are eye clean, so that isn't an issue. Chel said that H color shouldn't be an issue that takes away at all from the beauty of the stone, so light performance etc is it for me I guess.

Any other opinions are always welcome too. The more I hear the same thing the better I feel about my decision.

 

[msf12555]

Anyone else have any preference's between the two based on the ASET's or anything else? Hoping o make my purchase tomorrow morning, and the WF diamond seems to be the best bet so far.

 

[ariel144]

I vote for the WF stone. I think the WF ASET is better- less leakage. Also I prefer the smaller table on the WF stone too.

DITTO, the smaller table will make a lot prettier diamond.

 

[msf12555]

Thanks for the opinions, I really appreciate it. The master gemologist from WF (or one of them anyway) is going to call me tomorrow morning. I want to make sure that the feather listed in the AGS report isn't remotely visible to the naked eye, and also that it isn't going to make the ring weaker or increase chances of breaking or something like that.

I'll admit that I am a little torn though. I have been told by everyone who has commented on the ASET, IS, AGS report, etc, of the WF stone that it is going to be beautiful. Everyone that has purchased one of those A CUT ABOVE stones says they are beautiful. So fairly comforted there. However, my friend, who is a graduate GIA gemologist, keeps telling me about buying a stone "sight unseen". Now, I understand that most gemologists who work in jewelry stores would say that, but what do you guys all think? Is a good ASET and IS image, with a AGS000 rating, basically a guarantee that a stone will be brilliant and beautiful? Could a stone, with all the aforementioned things, really turn out to be a poor performer?

 

[msf12555]

Anyone? My sincere apologies for asking again, I am just trying to make my decision tomorrow morning. Thanks again!

 

[chel180]

My I princess is from WF and I couldn't be more happy with it, and I bought that unseen (of course with photos and ASETs etc). The princess you are looking at is a beauty, AGS0 stones are usually amazing as are WF in house selections. With buying unseen I would say that there is a slight chance that an AGS0/WF select stone is not super super, but there is no way an AGS0/WF select would be a dud. These stones are always going to be several levels above what you are likely to find in a Joe Bloggs jeweler. Additionally you have an ASET image which you don't often get when buying locally ( I would not buy a princess without a ASET). The WF stones has a great ASET so there is no way that the WF stone is a dud- no chance what so ever.

And you asked specifically why I preferred the WF ASET to the JA, well maybe this helps:

With ASET's you want the least black/white as this is light leakage. Next you want the most red that you can get as this is directly reflected light. Basically put the more red the better the stone will sparkle. Thirdly green light, this is a weaker light reflection which is still desirably but red is prefered. And then blue which is contrast so this is neither good or bad but makes up the patterns with the stone.

When comparing the two stones this is what I see
Both stones show little leakage=excellent.
The WF has around 60% red. The JA has around 30% red. Therefore the WF will sparkle more.

Here is a pic of the two stones side by side:

You can see that the table (top flat window into the stone) is round and smaller or the WF stone than the JA which has a larger squarer table. I personally think the smaller table is more visually pleasing.

Also if I remember right the WF stone was cheaper too! So I'd go for the better performing and cheaper diamond. You won't notice or get any benefit from the F VS1 as apposed to H VS2 except the numbers on the certificate.

 

[Christina...]

I agree, I think that the JA stone appears to have a lot more leakage on and around the table. I would go with the WF stone. You really can't go wrong with an AGS0 or with a WF select. And the fact that the setting is with WF, I think it makes it a no brainer. It's going to be a beautiful ring. Congrats, and be sure to come back with pics!

 

[tyty333]

Thanks for the opinions, I really appreciate it. The master gemologist from WF (or one of them anyway) is going to call me tomorrow morning. I want to make sure that the feather listed in the AGS report isn't remotely visible to the naked eye, and also that it isn't going to make the ring weaker or increase chances of breaking or something like that.

I'll admit that I am a little torn though. I have been told by everyone who has commented on the ASET, IS, AGS report, etc, of the WF stone that it is going to be beautiful. Everyone that has purchased one of those A CUT ABOVE stones says they are beautiful. So fairly comforted there. However, my friend, who is a graduate GIA gemologist, keeps telling me about buying a stone "sight unseen". Now, I understand that most gemologists who work in jewelry stores would say that, but what do you guys all think? Is a good ASET and IS image, with a AGS000 rating, basically a guarantee that a stone will be brilliant and beautiful? Could a stone, with all the aforementioned things, really turn out to be a poor performer?

An AGS000 A CUT ABOVE is a top of the line stone. I dont think you can go wrong. Most people on PS buy their
stones on-line. It gives you access to 1000 of stones vs a jeweler bringing in 3 from you to choose. I think
you've got it covered.

 

[msf12555]

Chel,

Thanks for the reassurance, that was very complete, and really made me feel better about my upcoming purchase. MUCH better.

Tyty,

Funny you should mention the three stones. The GIA grad friend that I mentioned earlier is getting three stones in tomorrow to look at, so I told her I wouldn't make a purchase until then. I sent her a link to the stone I am looking at, and she will let me know if she can do better. Given the stone that I chose, I doubt it, but she has helped me out with explanations throughout this whole process, so I owe her that at least. However, since my setting is also at WF, I don't think my current setup can be beat, especially for the price.

On a side note, I had some questions about the stone I chose at WF, contacted them, and ended up talking to Debi (who is the CEO apparently). She scheduled a time this morning for her gemologist to call me and discuss any concerns. He was excellent. I then discussed some financial concerns and my budget, and she worked with me to make sure I was able to get what I want, and also presented additional options. She then kept in email communication with me until she knew I was satisfied. Now, I won't make a final comment about WF until I have the ring in my hand, but I am VERY impressed so far.